Dynamic and adaptable system and method for selecting a user interface dialogue model

ABSTRACT

A communication system includes a selection module for selecting appropriate user interface types for nodes within a task. The selection module interacts with a selection criteria library and a user interface dialogue model library to determine an appropriate user interface. Selection criteria library and user interface dialogue model library may be selectively and dynamically adapted to reflect environmental, customer and organization changes.

TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION

[0001] The present invention relates in general to communication systemsand more particularly to an adaptable system and method for selecting auser interface dialogue model.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0002] Customers contact organizations such as telecommunicationscompanies in order to accomplish tasks including ordering a service,requesting repair service, or asking questions about their bill. When acustomer contacts the organization, the customer's call is connected toa user interface which may be a customer service representative or anyof a number of automated systems. Currently, when designing a system forcommunicating with customers, the determination of the type interface ordialogue model a customer will interact with is decided at an earlystage within the design of the communication system. Typically,designers choose a primary interface, such as a speech directed dialogueinterface, and a secondary or back-up interface, such as a touch toneinterface, in case the primary interface fails.

[0003] As a communication system changes over time, the existingdialogue model is often ill suited for newly added tasks. However, theexisting dialogue model is often maintained because redesigning thesystem to incorporate a new dialogue model is prohibitively expensive.This may lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of the system as wellas customer dissatisfaction and frustration.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0004] A more complete understanding of the present embodiments andadvantages thereof may be acquired by referring to the followingdescription taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, inwhich like reference numbers indicate like features, and wherein:

[0005]FIG. 1 is a depiction of a communication system including aselection module, user interface dialogue module library and selectioncriteria library according to the teachings of the present invention;

[0006]FIG. 2 shows a flow diagram of a user interface selection systemaccording to the present invention; and

[0007]FIG. 3 is a flow diagram of a method for selecting user interfacedialogue models.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0008] Preferred embodiments and their advantages are best understood byreference to FIGS. 1 through 3, wherein like numbers are used toindicate like and corresponding parts.

[0009] Now, referring to FIG. 1, a communication system forcommunicating with customers, depicted generally at 10, is shown.Communication system 10 is preferably designed to receive communicationsfrom customers or other constituents of an organization. In the presentembodiment, communication system 10 is designed to receive incomingcommunications from telecommunications customers on behalf of atelecommunications company.

[0010] Communication system 10 includes selection module 12 which isoperably connected with both user interface dialogue model 14 andselection criteria library 16. Persona library 50 as well as a pluralityof communication task modules such as module A, 60 module B, 70 andmodule C, 80 are also operably connected with selection module 12.

[0011] In the present embodiment, selection module 12 operates to selectan appropriate user interface for a particular node of a communicationtask. Selection module 12 includes criteria evaluation module 18,interface scoring module 20, interface selection module 22, personaevaluation module 24 and feedback module 25. Selection module 12 isgenerally operable to communicate with selection criteria library 16 anduser interface dialogue model library 14. User interface dialogue modellibrary 14 is a database or other information storage means for storinginformation about a plurality of different user interface dialoguemodels 30 which may also be referred to as user interfaces or dialoguemodels. User interface dialogue model library 14 includes criteriascores 38 for each user interface type.

[0012] In the present embodiment, user interface dialogue model library14 includes four user interface types: service representative 31, touchtone IVR 32, speech directed dialogue 34, and speech statisticallanguage model/natural language understanding (SLM/NLU) 36. In thepresent embodiment, criteria scores 38 are listed for each individualuser interface type and are also associated with a criteria number 39.Each criteria number 39 corresponds to a criteria 40 listed withinselection criteria library 16.

[0013] Selection criteria library 16 is a database or other informationstorage means for storing information related to selection criteria forselecting a user interface type. Selection criteria library 16 includesa listing of a plurality of criteria 40 and associated criteria weightscores 42. Criteria 40 may include, for example, criteria such as cost,customer satisfaction, automation rate, task completion rate, taskcomplexity, confidence of outcome, length of time in system, listlength, interface used in previous state, and a dialogue state counter.These example criteria 40 are described in greater detail with respectto FIG. 2, below. Criteria weight 42 is an assigned valuation of theimportance or weight given to each particular criteria 40. In thepresent embodiment, criteria weight 42 is dynamic and adaptable.Criteria weight 42 may be adapted, modified or changed to reflectchanging environmental factors, changing customer factors, and changingorganizational factors.

[0014] As an example, environmental factors may include background noiseand cell phone (modality) use. High background noise may shift the VUIselection to one that operates better in high noise. Cell phone mayshift the VUI selection to one that does not require keying informationmanually, but rather utilizes voice commands. Examples of customerfactors include changing customer views and priorities generally andsystem-specific factors. General views and priorities may include, forinstance, customer views on cost and customer service which may begained from survey data or other similar data. System-specific triggerevents such as increasing the weight of the “time in system” criteria ifthe average time a customer spends in the system exceeds a pre-selectedaverage. An example of a changing organization factor may be that anorganization may periodically change its goals with respect to factorssuch as cost and automation rate. In these instances, the criteriaweights may be changed to reflect changes in an organization's goals orpriorities.

[0015] Selection module 12 operates to select a proper user interfacetype from user interface dialogue model library 14 for anyone of theplurality of communication task modules 60, 70, or 80. Eachcommunication task module such as communication task module A 60includes a number of steps or nodes 62 required to complete the task.Each node may have associated therewith one or more variables 64.Variables 64 may be used to adjust the value of criteria weight 42 orcriteria score 39 to reflect node-specific factors. One example of anode-specific factor that is used to adjust criteria weight 42 is listlength. An example of where variable 64 may be used to adjust a criteriascore is with respect to the time in system score related to a servicerepresentative 31 form of user interface because the time in system forsuch an interface will be directly affected by whether or not a customerservice representative is available or whether the customer will be puton hold.

[0016] In operation, selection module 12 evaluates which user interfacetype 30 to use a particular communication task such as communicationtask module A 60. Selection module 12 first evaluates which userinterface type 30 to use for the first node 62 or step withincommunication task module A 60. After successful completion of each node62, selection module 12 evaluates and selects a user interface type foreach successive node 62 within the communication task module. Criteriaevaluation module 18 begins this process by retrieving criteria 40 andtheir associated criteria weights 42 from selection criteria library 16.Interface scoring module 20 then retrieves criteria scores 38 for eachof the plurality of listed user interface dialogue models 30. Interfacescore module 20 then, for each user interface dialogue model 30,multiplies each criteria score 38 with each corresponding criteriaweight 42 and adds the resulting values to determine an interface score.Interface selection module 22 then selects the user interface dialoguemodel that has the highest interface score. The communication node isthen directed to the selected user interface dialogue model and proceedsuntil the completion of the current node of the communication task.

[0017] In some embodiments, interface scoring module 20 may incorporateone or more values such as variable value 65 associated with a node,such as node 66. Variable value 65 may then be factored into a criteriaweight value 42 or a criteria score value 39. For example, interfacescoring module 20 may multiply selected criteria weight 67 by variable65. By multiplying the variable value with criteria weight 67, interfaceselection module 22 adjusts the criteria weight for node specificvariables. As another example, interface scoring module 20 mayincorporate variable value 69 as the criteria score for servicerepresentative 30 user interface type dialogue model. In this particularinstance, variable 69 is a factor that represents the average time(using a moving average) in system for a call routed to a servicerepresentative. Accordingly, when there are not enough servicerepresentatives to handle incoming calls, and customers must be put onhold before they can speak to a customer service representative, thismay be factored into the criteria score.

[0018] After selection module 12 selects a user interface type, personaevaluation module 24 may evaluate whether the selected user interfacedialogue is appropriate for the particular call based on call-specificaspects known as persona. In particular, persona evaluation module 24may be used to evaluate whether or not a specific call is appropriatefor user interface types that include a voice recognition component suchas a speech directed dialogue 34 or SLM/NLU 36. Persona library 50contains call specific data, including data related to the caller'schoice of words, the caller's pitch, modulation, and attitude. Ifpersona evaluation module 24 determines that the selected user interfacetype is not appropriate for a particular call then persona evaluationmodule communicates with interface selection module 22 to select theuser interface type with the next highest interface score. The processof persona evaluation 24 may then be repeated for the second selecteduser interface type.

[0019] Selection module 12 also includes feedback module 25. Feedbackmodule 25 automatically provides feedback to the variables 64 associatedwith the communication task module 60, criteria weights 42, and criteriascores 38. For example, feedback module 25 operates to and keep track ofthe success rate and time lengths associated with the plurality of userinterface types. Feedback module 25 may automatically adjust criteriaweights 42, communication task variables 64 and criteria scores 38 toreflect the current state of the communication system 10. Feedbackmodule 25 also allows a system administrator to manually adjust thecriteria weight 42 and criteria scores 39 to reflect changingenvironmental factors, customer factors, and organizational factors.

[0020] For example, if the customer begins with a very broad topic, thespeech SLM/NLU 36 style of “How May I help You/Speak Freely” would beutilized. However, if the environment has a lot of background noise, theTouch Tone 32 style would be utilized through operation of personaevaluation module 24. As the customer continues their interaction, thedialogue model could change from Speech Directed Dialogue 34 to aService Representative 31. An important aspect of this invention is thatthe dialogue models may change dynamically as the behavior and goals ofthe customer becomes more evident, the task evolves, and theenvironmental situation changes.

[0021] This invention also allows for the dynamic update of the contentof each dialogue model 30, based on user behavior and systemperformance. For example, a speech directed dialogue model 34 may bevery effective for billing tasks, but is not effective for repair tasks.In this case, touch tone model 32 may be adapted to be more likely to beselected for nodes related to repair tasks and to include repair optionsin a more prominent location within the interface. This functionalityhelps ensure that each interface type is customer-centric.

[0022] Now referring to FIG. 2, a flow diagram of a communication systemfor selecting a user interface, depicted generally at 100, is shown. Inoperation, a particular node or dialogue state is begun withincommunication system 100 at 110. When the node is begun 112, criteriaevaluation module 114 first considers criteria 132 stored withincriteria library 130. Criteria 132, in the present embodiment, includescost 134, customer satisfaction 136, automation rate 138, taskcompletion rate 140, task complexity 142, confidence of outcome 144,time in system 146, list of length 148, VUI for previous state 150 anddialogue state counter 152. In an alternative embodiment, additionalcriteria may be listed within criteria library 130 and some of thecriteria listed in the present embodiment may not be included.

[0023] Criteria library also includes a criteria weight 154corresponding to each criteria 132. Criteria weight 154 reflects therelative weight or importance placed on each particular criteria. Forinstance, if an organization is attempting to keep costs low, thecriteria weight 154 for the criteria of cost 134 would be set at arelative high valuation. In some embodiments, criteria weight 154 may beset at 0 for various criteria 132 effectively eliminating those criteriafrom consideration.

[0024] Cost 134 is a reflection of the cost of a particular interfacetype. For example, a service representative 168 is typically the mostexpensive form of user interface while a touch tone interface 166 istypically the least expensive form of user interface.

[0025] Customer satisfaction 136 is an indication of the degree to whichcallers, customers, or constituents are satisfied with the particularuser interface. Automation rate 138 is an indication of the rate atwhich user interface selection is more for automated systems (such as atouch tone or directed dialogue system) versus non-automated systems(such as a service representative). Task completion rate 140 is the rateof successful completion of tasks by a particular user interface type.In a particular embodiment task completion rate 140 may be specific tothe successful task completion rate of a particular user interface typeto a particular node or a particular communication task module (as shownin FIG. 1).

[0026] Confidence of outcome 144 is an indication of the likelihood thata particular node will be successfully completed. Time in system 146 isa reflection of the average time a user interface type takes to completea particular node. List length 148 is a node specific characteristicreflective of the number of list options associated with a particularnode. Interface from previous state 150 is an indication of the userinterface type that was used by the previous node. Dialogue statecounter 152 is a counter to keep track of the number of times a user hasused a particular dialogue state for a particular node. The dialoguestate counter is intended to indicate when a user continues to fail tocomplete a task after several attempts using a particular user interfacetype.

[0027] The use of tasks broken down into nodes as well as dialogue statecounter 152 helps the customer from “going backward” in the interaction.“Going backward” occurs when the interface style does not change and thecustomer fails in accomplishing their task with a particular style (forwhatever reason), and the customer may have to repeat information. Inother words, the customer may be asked to re-enter information that theypreviously provided. With this invention, the library provides adialogue model knowing the current state of information.

[0028] Criteria evaluation module 114 retrieves the criteria 132 andcorresponding weights 154 as described with respect to criteriavaluation module 18 shown in FIG. 1. Next, user interface scoring module116 interacts with user interface library 160. User interface library160 includes criteria weight information for a plurality of userinterface types. In the present embodiment the user interface typesinclude statistical language model 162, directed dialogue model 164,touch tone model 166, and service representative 168. In an alternativeembodiment, additional user interface types may be included and lessthan all the current user interface types may be included. The presentinvention encompasses web-based and wireless web-based user interfacetypes.

[0029] Criteria scores 170 are particular to each user interface typeand a criteria score corresponding to each criteria 132 listed withincriteria library 130 is preferably maintained. Criteria scores 170 arepreferably a relative reflection of the strength of each particularinterface type with respect to each criteria 132. For example, withrespect to cost 134, statistical language module 162 will have a lowercriteria score than directed dialogue module 164 because a statisticallanguage model type interface 162 is typically more expensive thandirected dialogue type interface 164. However, touch tone type interface166 will have a higher criteria score than a directed dialogue interfaceand a service representative type interface 168 will have a lowercriteria score 170 than a statistical language model 162 type userinterface.

[0030] User interface scoring module 116 retrieves criteria scoreinformation 170 from user interface library 160 similar to the operationof interface scoring module 20 as described with respect to FIG. 1. Userinterface scoring module 116 calculates a user interface score bymultiplying criteria weight 154 by criteria score 170 for each criteria132 and for each of the plurality of user interfaces. The resulting sumof all of the criteria weights multiplied by their correspondingcriteria scores 170 is equal to the interface score for each particularuser interface type. User interface scoring module 116 then selects theuser interface type with the highest interface score. In an alternativeembodiment such as the embodiment shown in FIG. 1, a separate model suchas the interface selection module 22 performs the selection of the userinterface type. In some embodiments, user interface scoring module 116may rank the user interface types according to their interface scores.

[0031] In the present embodiment, after user interface scoring module116 selects an appropriate user interface type, persona considerationmodule 116 interfaces with persona library 180 to determine whether theselected user interface is appropriate for a particular call. Personalibrary 180 includes a number of call specific factors including age182, gender 184, choice of words 186, pitch 188, modulation 190, andattitude of 192. For each factor persona library 180 also includespersona score of 194. In an alternative embodiment, more or fewer callspecific factors may be included within persona library 180. In thepresent embodiment, persona consideration module 118 operates similarlyto persona evaluation module 24 as shown in FIG. 1 and is primarilydirected to considering the appropriateness of voice activated userinterface types.

[0032] After the persona consideration module approves of the interfaceselection, the node is advanced to allow interaction with user 120. Ifthe node is successfully completed, the method is repeated for the nextnode. If the node is not successfully completed 124, criteria evaluationmodule 114 reconsiders the criteria 132 contained within criterialibrary 130 for the particular node 112. In effect, the process isrepeated. In addition, information related to handling node 112 isincorporated into feedback module 128. Feedback module 128 interactswith user interface library 160 to adjust criteria scores 170 and withcriteria library 130 to adjust criteria weights 154 appropriately.

[0033] Now referring to FIG. 3, a flow diagram showing a method forselecting user interface dialogue nodes is shown. The method begins 200by determining the appropriate criteria for the first node of a task212. The criteria for the first node of the task are then scored 214 anda dialogue module or interface type is selected to complete the firstnode of the task 216.

[0034] In some embodiments (not expressly shown), an additional step maybe implemented following selection step 216. This added step wouldpreferably gather feed back information pertaining to the results of thecustomer's experience with the first node. For example, if the customerfails to successfully complete the first node or if there is a highbackground noise, this information may be considered for the next step,218. This additional step my then be repeated after each subsequentselection step 222 and 228.

[0035] Next, a selection criteria for a second node of a particular taskare determined 218. The selected criteria for the second node of thetasks are then weighed or scored 220 and an appropriate dialogue moduleis selected to complete the second node of the particular task 222.These steps are then repeated for each ensuing node of a task such thatfor the n^(th) node of a particular task the appropriate criteria aredetermined 224 and then scored or weighed 226 to determine and select anappropriate dialogue task 228.

[0036] The present invention advantageously allows the unique advantagesof particular dialogue models matched with nodes to the customer's andorganization's advantage. The selection of which dialogue model is adynamic and customizable approach that can be adapted over time based onthe priorities defined by the company, user behavior, and systemperformance.

[0037] Although the disclosed embodiments have been described in detail,it should be understood that various changes, substitutions, andalterations can be made to the embodiments without departing from theirspirit and scope.

What is claimed is:
 1. An adaptable user interface selection systemcomprising: a selection module operable to receive a request for a userinterface dialogue model for a dialogue node within a communicationaction, the selection module having a criteria evaluation module and aninterface scoring module; a selection criteria library including aplurality of selection criteria, each selection criteria having anassociated criteria weight; a user interface library including aplurality of user interface dialogue models, each of the plurality ofuser interface dialogue models having a criteria score for each of theplurality of selection criteria; the criteria evaluation module operableto retrieve the plurality of selection criteria and the associatedweights from the selection criteria library; the user interface scoringmodule operable to retrieve the associated criteria score from the userinterface library and determine an interface score for each userinterface dialogue model; and the selection module operable to selectthe user interface dialogue model having the highest interface score. 2.An adaptable user interface selection system comprising: a selectionmodule operable to receive a request for a user interface dialogue modelfor a dialogue node within a communication action; a selection criterialibrary including a plurality of selection criteria, each selectioncriteria having an associated criteria weight; a user interface libraryincluding a plurality of user interface dialogue models, each of theplurality of user interface dialogue models having a criteria score foreach of the plurality of selection criteria; the selection moduleoperable to communicate with the selection criteria library and the userinterface library to calculate an interface score for each dialoguemodel and select a user interface dialogue model for the dialogue node.3. The selection system of claim 2 wherein the selection module furthercomprises: a criteria evaluation module operable to retrieve theplurality of selection criteria and the associated weights from theselection criteria library; a user interface scoring module operable toretrieve the associated criteria score from the user interface libraryand determine an interface score for each user interface dialogue model;and the selection module further operable to select the user interfacedialogue model having the highest interface score.
 4. The selectionsystem of claim 3 wherein the user interface scoring moduledetermination of the interface score for each user interface dialoguemodel includes multiplying the associated criteria weight of eachcriteria with the associated criteria value.
 5. The selection system ofclaim 2 wherein the dialogue node further comprises at least oneassociated variable value for adjusting the interface score.
 6. Theselection system of claim 5 further comprising the at least oneassociated variable value operable to adjust the criteria weightassociated with at least one selection criteria.
 7. The selection systemof claim 5 further comprising the at least one associated variable valueoperable to adjust at least one criteria score associated with at leastone user interface dialogue model.
 8. The selection system of claim 2wherein the selection criteria library includes at least two criteriaselected from the group consisting of cost, customer satisfaction,automation rate, task completion rate, task complexity, confidence ofoutcome, time in system, list length, interface of previous node anddialogue state counter.
 9. The selection system of claim 2 wherein theuser interface library includes at least two user interface dialoguemodule selected from the group consisting of speech statistical languagemodel/natural language understanding, speech directed dialogue, touchtone Interactive Voice Response, and service representative.
 10. Theselection system of claim 2 further comprising: a persona libraryincluding call specific factors; and a persona consideration moduleoperable to evaluate the user interface dialogue module selection basedupon the factors of the persona library.
 11. The selection system ofclaim 2 further comprising a feedback module operable to automaticallyadjust the criteria weights and the criteria scores.
 12. The selectionsystem of claim 11 further comprising: the adjustment module operable toadjust the criteria weights and the criteria scores based upon at leastone factor selected from the group consisting of environmental factors,customer factors, and organization factors.
 13. The selection system ofclaim 2 further comprising an adjustment module operable to allowselective adjustment of the criteria weights and criteria scores.
 14. Anadaptable selection module comprising: a criteria evaluation moduleoperable to retrieve selection criteria and associated criteria weightsfrom a selection criteria library; a user interface scoring moduleoperable to retrieve criteria score information from a user interfacelibrary and determine an interface score for each of a plurality of userinterface dialogue models; and a user interface dialogue selectionmodule operable to select the user interface dialogue model having thehighest interface score.
 15. The adaptable selection module of claim 14further comprising a persona selection consideration module operable toevaluate the appropriate selected user interface dialogue model.
 16. Theadaptable selection module of claim 15 further comprising the personaselection consideration module operable to evaluate each selection of avoice-activated type user interface dialogue model.
 17. The adaptableselection module of claim 14 further comprising a feedback moduleoperable to automatically adjust the criteria weights and the criteriascores
 18. A user interface dialogue model selection method comprising:Receiving a node of a communication action; retrieving criteria andassociated criteria weights from a criteria library; retrieving criteriascores for a plurality of user interface dialogue models; calculating aninterface score for each of the plurality of user interface dialoguemodels; and selecting a user interface dialogue model based upon theinterface scores.
 19. The method of claim 18 further comprisingautomatically updating the criteria weights in the criteria librarybased upon factors selected from the group consisting of environmentalfactors, customer factors, and organization factors.
 20. The method ofclaim 18 further comprising: receiving at least one variable valueassociated with the node; and incorporating the variable value into theinterface score calculation of at least one of the plurality of userinterface dialogue models.